Philosophy: Determinism and Free Will

IB Philosophy Core Theme: Determinism and Free Will Core Theme: Determinism and Free Will > Determinism: Everything that happens is determined by prior causes – every event is the necessary result of the chain of causes leading up to it – one that runs indefinitely back into the past. – ( #1) – “there seems to denote only one possible future – it is theoretically possible.” – (#2) – “if human actions are determined, it suggests that we have no moral responsibility for our actions.” – 1. Human decision and actions follow causation. 2. Yet most of us believe that at least some of the time we are responsible for our actions. 3. We praise and blame ourselves according to what we do, just as we praise others. 4. This implies that we are in control and that we can make free choices. – however determinism would render this all meaningless. (The Leopold and Loeb trial featuring defense attorney Clarence Darrow shows how determinism can potentially reduce the accountability of a person. Regardless, it is a wonderful case to study.) > Libertarianism: the idea that people have the ability to make moral decisions and are subsequently morally accountable. – (argument #1) – “Kant saw the essence of moral life as fulfillment of the moral law and believed that we required freedom, as a concept is only a moral concept if it is chosen.” – (argument #2) – “Kant argued that it is a matter of perspective – judged externally, actions may seem to be predictable and determined, however internally my actions are free, because I am aware that I could choose differently.” (It is important to be clear about the form of freedom that determinism argues against.) > Practical Freedom: The freedom to do what one wishes, to realize one’s desires – this is the kind of freedom that people can have in differing degrees. > Metaphysical Freedom: The freedom of being ultimately responsible for one’s choices – if we have it, we have it to more or less the same degree. There seems to be three ways to respond to the conflict: [1] Accept determinism and reject libertarianism. – (argument #1) – “one reason for holding that freedom is real and not illusory is simply based on how it feels – however this commits the fallacy of intentionally and hard determinists are thus unlikely to be moved by an emotional appeal.” – (argument #2) – “our moral principles and institutions rest on the assumption that we are free – however even if this shows that determinism conflicts with our deeply entrenched beliefs, it does not prove it false.” [2] Show how determinism and free will are compatible. – (argument #1) – “soft determinism holds that even if all events are causally determined, there is still a clear difference between free and un-free actions.” – according to soft determinism, you are free to perform an action as long as you are not forced to do it or prevented from doing it – this fails to solve the main conflict in determinism as it simply reconciles determinism and practical freedom. [3] Endorse the idea that we have free will and reject determinism. – (argument #1) – “the prevailing unpredictability in our universe is supported by science such as Chaos Theory or Quantum mechanics which reinforces this idea of randomness.” (It is important to consider the consequences for each of these views. A hard determinist view suggests that a person cannot be held accountable for his actions. A view supporting free will Conclusion: > We have shown that the middle way offered by soft determinism does not solve the dilemma. (This is not necessarily the only conclusion. Different inferences can be made depending on the premises that can be drawn.) (It is always good to research more views of an issue and formulate your own perspective.) > We are thus left with the original sharp opposition between two apparently irreconcilable views.